NYT's Abramson finds defenders online

4/24/13 4:18 PM EDT

Critics on Wednesday came to the defense of New York Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson over a POLITICO story about her relationship to the Times newsroom, arguing the criticism in the piece was sexist and unfair to the paper of record’s first female editor.

“It mixes anonymously voiced insider accounts with a few protesting on-the-record sources to paint a picture of a newsroom so buffeted by personality conflicts that it just barely won four Pulitzer Prizes and calmly and accurately guided readers through the Boston bombings,” wrote Poynter’s Andrew Beaujon.

Many others attacked the article’s sources, most of whom insisted on anonymity, for using sexist tropes and criticizing Abramson for traits that would be praised if she were male.

“She’s a source of widespread frustration and anxiety who is demoralizing, uncaring, morale-draining, and very unpopular. He demands excellence and relevance,” former American Prospect and GOOD Magazine editor Ann Friedman wrote. “She is difficult to work with, unreasonable, impossible, stubborn. He has a strong vision and insists on seeing it carried out.”

Many Twitter users zeroed in on one incident described in the piece: Dean Baquet, then the Times’ Washington bureau chief and now its managing editor, once drove his fist through a wall when a favored story didn’t make A1. The anecdote, the story says, is recalled “fondly.” If Abramson punched a wall, they argue, the memories wouldn’t be as fond.

“In this story of toxic NYT gossip, the man who puts his fist through walls is the ‘calm man,’” The Guardian’s Heidi Moore wrote.

Some critics took aim at POLITICO’s handling of the piece. The Times’ own media critic, David Carr, said the story criticizes Abramson for doing her job.